Answer a Question

        If you fail your test, you must be dumb. That's what many standards are telling us. Throughout schooling years each students take an average of 80 tests or more. Many schools have been relying more and more on their students test scores to access intelligence. But, do these tests really give the real demeanor of the knowledge of the students? Testing has been implemented as a way to examine a students knowledge and demonstrate what they know. It has many important objectives such as determining if a student knows the subject, needs more help or practice, or determine if work needs to be more challenging.  All those reasons determine why students are tested. It is the clear and easy way to demonstrate knowledge, but not the only way. Testing students is only one means to determine a student's ability and could be demonstrated in many other ways. So why is our country so fixated over testing? Everyone may not be a great test taker, getting really stressed out over testing, or even blank out because of the pressure. Yet, many schools across America are using highly weighted grading scales that lean way more towards testing. Standardized testing is something that nobody wants to do, but it is determined it needs to be in place to rank the knowledge of students. Yet, a name and a score on a paper does not define the intelligence of a student. It doesn't show content of what a students knows. So, why do we keep relying on these scores? It is my opinion schools across America should not be relying heavily on standardized test scores like proficiency test such as ACT, SAT and exit exams to rate the knowledge of students.

        Schools begin testing children at a very young age. New standardized proficiency tests have been impose to examine the ability of young children starting in third grade. The organization of No Child Left Behind created standardized test to make sure kids are competent at a given level and are ready to move on to more difficulty schooling. Is it worth testing our kids at such a young age? The test actually has a large bearing on these children's future. They must pass at proficient level to make sure they are ready to move forward in their education. If not, they receive extra help to get caught up. Is it fair to put that much pressure on a young children? Even though it may not the best way to measure a student's accomplishments, it is necessary to make sure they are learning at the appropriate rate and provide extra attention if needed. Smith believes "I can see why we test Reading at such a young age because it is a skill that is necessary for life, but testing at this age adds too much stress." Even though these tests are not for a grade, the importance of testing brings high stakes. The only issue is that many children are not taking the test as serious as they probably should. At such a young age, they usually don't understand the consequences of their actions on this test. In this case it would be unfair to rate the kids and determine their knowledge level if they aren't taking testing seriously. Many educators have come to conclusions that we need to keep these test, but not rely as heavy on them as many schools and states do. There are many other factors that need to be determined in order to rate a student's ability than simply their test taking skills. Looking at how a student performs in the classroom everyday is just as important. A student might pay attention, do all their classwork and homework, try their best, but fail a test. We can not base a student entire body of knowledge by one test. It is important to look at the whole picture including time in the classroom.  

        Passing any test in general can bring high stakes to students grades, especially when it determines if a schooling career will continues. In order to gain acceptance, many colleges and university require students to take and meet a predetermined amount of points on a standardized. Both the ACT and SAT tests a student's abilities in a wide variety of topics including writing, math, science, reading, and English. The setting of strict time limits bring much stress to the test taker. Does this really predict a student's potential in college? Over the past few years, some colleges and universities have actually lessened the weight of these tests and are using them to award scholarships, rather than setting a specific score for admission. Yet, many students are fixated on making a particular score by taking test preparation classes and receiving tutoring. Many students learn that there are ways to beat the system. Could it be not so much the information on the test that matters, but rather knowing how to take the test. Like Smith, students take classes that prepare you how to take the test, make a good guess at the answers rather than knowing the information. So, in this case what are we really testing? Smith says " I never actually learned anything from  the class that helped me become a better student. I improved my score and made myself look like a better student without learning." Is that fair to the students that are hard working and who actually learn? It is difficult to determine what are the best parameters to rate a student's knowledge for admission to college. Outside constraints like stress and pressure can lead to poor results and not demonstrate a students ability. Smith states " we need to keep the test in place, but only weigh it to be about 1/3 of the decision whether or not to admit a student." These test don't really tell the whole story about a student. Other factors that should be looked at are the type and difficulty of the classes, GPA, leadership positions and outside school activities like sports, community service and work experience. Student's abilities should not be weighted so heavily on test scores. Finding a happy medium needs to be found to rate students fairly.    

        Now with new high school standards being imposed, students have to pass an exit exam to earn their diploma. This has been gaining more popularity over the past several years. Starting in the south, many states have decided to create a standardized exit or graduation exam in order for a student to attain their diploma.  Research shows prior to the late 1970's, "high school students earned their diplomas by showing up for classes, keeping up their grades, and staying out of trouble (Warren)." Now, many schools require students to pass core subjects to graduate. Yet teachers and researchers are saying."These tests do not challenge our students (Warren)." They are too easy and do not challenge the student enough. In the event a student fails a core course, they get extra help and tutoring in the parts they fail or retake the course. But for students who pass, they get nothing out of it. Smith says "Why are we as a society so into getting something out of it?" There is no need to get anything out of it. If you pass the test, then you get to graduate. Why do we need more out of it? It begs to ask the question, is it worth keeping these exit exams in place? Society does agree that there needs to be some way to rate a students learning, but these tests are not cutting it. Today other major flaws are occurring in our schools for using these kinds of test. "Teachers have been teaching to the test more than  about curriculum (Warren)." Smith agrees that teachers do try to integrate their classroom curriculum with testing preparedness but they often stray away from the curriculum to focus more about making sure students pass. Particularly when a teacher or school is awarded based on their student's test scores. A new system needs to be developed to make sure students are learning the material needed in school and be a fair judgement of their knowledge.   

        To escape testing in today's society is impossible. Testing continues to be the hallmark and will remain the means to measure intelligence for a very long time. What society can change is how heavily we are weighting standardized tests. We need to stop relying so heavily on scores from a paper test, and rather look at the individual in the entire spectrum of education. Why do we keep using test scores as a major way to analyze our students? It is clearly not giving us a total perspective of any student. Too many factors can result in students not preforming at their highest capabilities on a test. Teachers and researchers agree that using standardized testing may not be the best way to examine students or at least not put so much weight on them, but is the way they are told to prepare their students. Hopefully in the future we are able to have a system to accurately judge a students knowledge without putting them under major stress and pressure of standardized testing.


Works Cited

Warren, John Robert. and Grodsky, Eric. "Exit Exams Harm Students Who Fail Them-- And Don't Benefit Students Who Pass       Them." Phi Delta Kappan 90.9 (2009): 645-649. Academic Search Complete. Web. 29 Oct. 2013.

Smith, Lawren Personal interview. 1 Nov.2013